Cargando…

990. Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little?

BACKGROUND: Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a guideline-recommended strategy; there are limited data on rates of concordance with guideline recommendations. We sought to evaluate rates of concordance, hypothesizing that antibiotics would overprescribed for prophylaxis...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dhanani, Muhammad, Gupta, Kalpana, Strymish, Judith
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7777542/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1176
_version_ 1783630926424571904
author Dhanani, Muhammad
Gupta, Kalpana
Strymish, Judith
author_facet Dhanani, Muhammad
Gupta, Kalpana
Strymish, Judith
author_sort Dhanani, Muhammad
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a guideline-recommended strategy; there are limited data on rates of concordance with guideline recommendations. We sought to evaluate rates of concordance, hypothesizing that antibiotics would overprescribed for prophylaxis against SBP. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients at the Boston Veterans Affairs Medical Center who underwent paracentesis between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2018. Exclusion criteria included absence of cirrhosis and hepatic transplantation, either prior to enrollment or during the study period. Manual review was used to capture demographic data, guideline concordance, microbiology results and healthcare utilization within one year of enrollment. Descriptive and analytical statistics were performed. RESULTS: Of 259 patients eligible for analysis, 181 (70%) met inclusion criteria; 65 patients (25%) were excluded as cirrhosis was not confirmed. Small numbers of other patients were excluded for other reasons [Figure 1]. Incorrect antibiotic utilization was noted in 80 patients (44%) [Figure 2]. Among 93 patients meriting antibiotics, 65 (70%) did not receive them. Conversely, among 90 who did not have an indication for antibiotic prophylaxis, 15 (17%) received it (p = 0.03, chi-squared test). Receipt of SBP prophylaxis was not correlated with gastroenterologist involvement, infection by antibiotic-resistant bacteria or development of illness due to Clostridioides difficile. No difference in hospital readmission rates was observed between groups receiving guideline-concordant and guideline-discordant prophylaxis. Figure 1 [Image: see text] Figure 2 [Image: see text] CONCLUSION: We expected to find overprescription of SBP prophylaxis. In fact, we found that the largest error in prescribing was underprescribing, which may be equally as harmful as inappropriate use of antibiotics. SBP prophylaxis may be an important target for antibiotic stewardship and education. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7777542
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77775422021-01-07 990. Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little? Dhanani, Muhammad Gupta, Kalpana Strymish, Judith Open Forum Infect Dis Poster Abstracts BACKGROUND: Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a guideline-recommended strategy; there are limited data on rates of concordance with guideline recommendations. We sought to evaluate rates of concordance, hypothesizing that antibiotics would overprescribed for prophylaxis against SBP. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients at the Boston Veterans Affairs Medical Center who underwent paracentesis between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2018. Exclusion criteria included absence of cirrhosis and hepatic transplantation, either prior to enrollment or during the study period. Manual review was used to capture demographic data, guideline concordance, microbiology results and healthcare utilization within one year of enrollment. Descriptive and analytical statistics were performed. RESULTS: Of 259 patients eligible for analysis, 181 (70%) met inclusion criteria; 65 patients (25%) were excluded as cirrhosis was not confirmed. Small numbers of other patients were excluded for other reasons [Figure 1]. Incorrect antibiotic utilization was noted in 80 patients (44%) [Figure 2]. Among 93 patients meriting antibiotics, 65 (70%) did not receive them. Conversely, among 90 who did not have an indication for antibiotic prophylaxis, 15 (17%) received it (p = 0.03, chi-squared test). Receipt of SBP prophylaxis was not correlated with gastroenterologist involvement, infection by antibiotic-resistant bacteria or development of illness due to Clostridioides difficile. No difference in hospital readmission rates was observed between groups receiving guideline-concordant and guideline-discordant prophylaxis. Figure 1 [Image: see text] Figure 2 [Image: see text] CONCLUSION: We expected to find overprescription of SBP prophylaxis. In fact, we found that the largest error in prescribing was underprescribing, which may be equally as harmful as inappropriate use of antibiotics. SBP prophylaxis may be an important target for antibiotic stewardship and education. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures Oxford University Press 2020-12-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7777542/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1176 Text en © The Author 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Poster Abstracts
Dhanani, Muhammad
Gupta, Kalpana
Strymish, Judith
990. Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little?
title 990. Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little?
title_full 990. Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little?
title_fullStr 990. Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little?
title_full_unstemmed 990. Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little?
title_short 990. Prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little?
title_sort 990. prophylaxis against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: too much or too little?
topic Poster Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7777542/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1176
work_keys_str_mv AT dhananimuhammad 990prophylaxisagainstspontaneousbacterialperitonitistoomuchortoolittle
AT guptakalpana 990prophylaxisagainstspontaneousbacterialperitonitistoomuchortoolittle
AT strymishjudith 990prophylaxisagainstspontaneousbacterialperitonitistoomuchortoolittle